Drug Test for Unemployment Benies.

Illegal use of drugs Twin - not use of illegal drugs. Not really the same thing, but close enough for "progressive" work.

PrintSmith wrote: Illegal use of drugs Twin - not use of illegal drugs. Not really the same thing, but close enough for "progressive" work.

Understood. Enough for the progressive deflection move. If ASpen Valley is as smart as I believe she is, she'll understand what my meaning was. We'll see.

LadyJazzer wrote: And whether you like them or not, your garbage is spin... It's not social welfare... But thanks for playing.

According to the unquestioned final arbitrator Wikipedia (OK, I joke, but it's still of interest)...

Unemployment compensation is money received from the United States and a state by a worker who has become unemployed through no fault of their own. In the United States, this compensation is classified as a type of social welfare benefit. According to the Internal Revenue Code, these types of benefits are to be included in a taxpayer's gross income.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unemployment_benefits

And from businessdictionary.com (perhaps a bit biased from the business perspective)...

Definition

Government welfare scheme under which employable persons who are unemployed through no fault of their own (but are available for work and are actively seeking paying jobs) are given monthly sums (called unemployment benefit) for sustenance.

http://www.businessdictionary.com/definition/unemployment-insurance.html

Of course it is a social welfare program pine - it was simply hoped that by calling it insurance instead of welfare that the stigma that existed when the welfare program was created would be overcome. The society at that time, unlike the one now in existence, disapproved of being on the government dole. The whole of the Social Security Act, which is the legislation that created Unemployment Insurance, is nothing more, or less, than a social welfare program. One would either have to have no understanding of history, or think that others lacked it, to state otherwise.

Gee, look what happens when you add politicians to the list of must pee in a cup...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/2 ... tml?ref=tw

Imagine that... All of a sudden, it's not such a good idea....

Here's another example of a brilliant amendment being attached to a stupid bill that will likely get it killed....

Janet Howell, Virginia State Senator, Attaches Rectal Exam Amendment To Anti-Abortion Bill

To protest a bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound before having an abortion, Virginia State Sen. Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) on Monday attached an amendment that would require men to have a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before obtaining a prescription for erectile dysfunction medication.

"We need some gender equity here," she told HuffPost. "The Virginia senate is about to pass a bill that will require a woman to have totally unnecessary medical procedure at their cost and inconvenience. If we're going to do that to women, why not do that to men?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/3 ... 42627.html

I LOVE IT.... :thumbsup:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:
Fine with me... I have to take a drug test to be employed... they certainly can take one if they want my money... consider it a taxpayer demanded drug test. And I don't care if it cost money. That stupid rubric never caused a lefty to complain before. I'm not a compassionate conservative and I don't give two sh*ts if they feel embarrassed or demeaned. Feeling embarrassed or demeaned isn't one of the qualifications in getting unemployment benefits. And those benefits were set aside for them, not guaranteed to them. There's a lot of other rules and regulations that can prevent them form collecting unemployment. Are those other rules and regulations embarrassing and demeaning , Unemployment benefits are not automatic or a right. Would you like to get rid of any requirements to be eligible for unemployment benefits other than being out of a job?

You're such a little f****t

LadyJazzer wrote: Imagine that... All of a sudden, it's not such a good idea....

Here's another example of a brilliant amendment being attached to a stupid bill that will likely get it killed....

Janet Howell, Virginia State Senator, Attaches Rectal Exam Amendment To Anti-Abortion Bill

To protest a bill that would require women to undergo an ultrasound before having an abortion, Virginia State Sen. Janet Howell (D-Fairfax) on Monday attached an amendment that would require men to have a rectal exam and a cardiac stress test before obtaining a prescription for erectile dysfunction medication.

"We need some gender equity here," she told HuffPost. "The Virginia senate is about to pass a bill that will require a woman to have totally unnecessary medical procedure at their cost and inconvenience. If we're going to do that to women, why not do that to men?"

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/3 ... 42627.html

I LOVE IT.... :thumbsup:

You beat me to it!!! Gotta love it. I would love it if it was the other way around too....this seems to be a cool new trend, keeping people honest by making them eat their own cooking. This is good for all of us. At least there are leaders using tools to keep the crazies in check. This will work both ways and can hopefully keep the other party from doing unfair stuff too. It is hard to come up with an example though because the right likes to restrict social rights and the left tries to restrict economic rights (our two anti freedom parties)...trying to picture the right getting back by attaching a rider that says that if we are going to tax 30% of rich people's income, we will also tax 30% of poor people's income. (remember %'s are the measure of the fair share).

Here is a case of a citizen keeping a biggot honest, or at least not doing business with him (she treats him like we treat Iran/Cuba because he is not accepted in her society, a left winger taking a right wing tactic to address a right wing ignorance, pretty cool)...

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/01/3 ... 41693.html

Just because I can trash both parties does not align me with either.

YYoo

Vice Lord wrote:

The Liberals GOP Twin wrote:
Fine with me... I have to take a drug test to be employed... they certainly can take one if they want my money... consider it a taxpayer demanded drug test. And I don't care if it cost money. That stupid rubric never caused a lefty to complain before. I'm not a compassionate conservative and I don't give two sh*ts if they feel embarrassed or demeaned. Feeling embarrassed or demeaned isn't one of the qualifications in getting unemployment benefits. And those benefits were set aside for them, not guaranteed to them. There's a lot of other rules and regulations that can prevent them form collecting unemployment. Are those other rules and regulations embarrassing and demeaning , Unemployment benefits are not automatic or a right. Would you like to get rid of any requirements to be eligible for unemployment benefits other than being out of a job?

You're such a little f****t

:woo hoo: you can always count on vl for the most intelligent debates. And isn't calling someone a homosexual slur as bad as using the "n" word?

FredHayek wrote: And isn't calling someone a homosexual slur as bad as using the "n" word?

Gee, that's never bothered you guys before... ?